-
Originally Posted by mondograss
Maybe, but he'd be damned if he did, and damned if he didn't.
To him, yes.
To the market, no. Market prefers he takes a lesser role given how he has well and truly spent $140m of IPO money to nowhere.
-
I'm not disagreeing that he needs to let someone else be in charge, but given how people on this forum seem to freak out that the sky is falling in every time a director of even a profitable, well-run company, sells a small fraction of their shares, I stand by my comment.
-
-
R&D Expenditures
FY2011 $16M
FY2012 $24M
FY2013 $27M
FY2014 $34M
FY2015 $49M
FY2016 $62.8M
FY2017 $64M
TOTAL $276.8M
According to todays presentation $10M savings p.a achieved from reducing headcount by 76, 40 of which came from R&D. Pro rata this maybe $5M (or thereabouts) off the FY2018 R&D expense to say $60M.
Slide 22 shows only 13% of revenue comes from New Customers.
Anyone know when this level of R&D spend ends?
-
Originally Posted by moimoi
Anyone know when this level of R&D spend ends?
Quite easy - as soon as they run out of money (1).
Seriously - if they are successful, than they will need a huge and consistent development effort just to keep their deployed systems running. These tools are never finished. The fact that basically every new client requires something special (different existing IT environment and for sure different requirements) means they will need to further top up on development.
Asking when their development effort will ramp down is like asking when SAP will reduce their huge development effort.
Obviously, though - if they are not successful, than go to (1)
----
"Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future" (Niels Bohr)
-
Q, Is OHE being "held up " so that the "rights" issue gets across the line ?
-
Originally Posted by whatsup
Q, Is OHE being "held up " so that the "rights" issue gets across the line ?
Wash your mouth out with vinegar and baking soda.
The ever vigilant NZX and FMA would never allow such market manipulation to occur - EVER.
For reference to how they are very vigilant at stamping out said practices, refer PEB leading to, during and after capital raisings.
Last edited by Balance; 01-06-2017 at 11:27 AM.
-
Originally Posted by Balance
Wash your mouth out with vinegar and baking soda.
The ever vigilant NZX and FMA would never allow such market manipulation to occur - EVER.
For reference to how they are very vigilant at stamping out said practices, refer PEB leading to, during and after capital raisings.
Actually - I don't think there is any law which stops parties interested in a stock to buy some more (unless they have insider information)? And who could tell the reason for them buying?
----
"Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future" (Niels Bohr)
-
Originally Posted by BlackPeter
Actually - I don't think there is any law which stops parties interested in a stock to buy some more (unless they have insider information)? And who could tell the reason for them buying?
Or maybe someone thinks they are a bargain as its software has some intrinsic value.Even IQE has intrinsic value
-
Junior Member
Hi, first post. If you haven't already then head over to glass door and get some insights.
To keep this post brief then if you get a job for 20 million that actually costs 30 million to do and then you get a job for 30 million and then use the first payment for this to complete the earlier job...then you can see where this is going.
In the IT business (and in many others) then getting the job is the easy bit, completing it is a lot harder.
Tags for this Thread
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|
Bookmarks